Live data from Hacker News

EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

economist.com

291–300 of 303 posts

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#291
post #232
post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might be thinking of Accenture, which was founded from the ashes of Andersen Consulting. Andressen is one half of Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) which (I think?) doesn't have any connection to Enron.

Accenture is Andersen Consulting. It left and changed its name to Accenture because of internal infighting and politics prior to the Enron scandal that took down Andersen entirely.

The name Accenture was also chosen because they were able to keep using Andersen Consulting's existing ac.com domain w/o interruption.

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a bit confused because this isn't my industry. What exactly are these consultants doing? What are they supposed to 'deliver'?

The big consulting firm runs a program/project to deliver a result. Perhaps implement a new business system or technology or integration, optimize or implement a new process, perform some organizational change in the way things are done, etc. Companies don’t have the skills or experience or expertise or resources or time in-house to do it themselves, so they essentially outsource the initiative or objective to a cons…

Agree with all of these except the “pay little.” Top consulting firms are crazy expensive to the point we could hire a team of several analysts and a manager for a few years for what we pay them.

Engagements are often around $100k a month and when I go looking for one of the consultants to help in an emergency, I often hear they are busy with something else (another client) and need a day to get the request started. When we’re paying 100k a month you better damn well have one person on deck or able to pivot immediately to us as if they are one of our employees.

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#293
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

I acknowledge that my comments in the last time where short and bold/flamebaiting, because i was on my phone. I will be explaining my views more thoroughly.

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#294
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

I acknowledge that my comments in the last time where short and bold/flamebaiting, because i was on my phone. I will be explaining my views more thoroughly.

Appreciated! If you explain them more thoroughly while sticking to the site guidelines (e.g. curious, respectful conversation, without swipes or snark), all should be fine.

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#295

I don't know if I have just enough knowledge to be dangerous, but it seems to me that auditors don't really do what people think they do. Auditors seem mainly to just double check the numbers they're handed. This serves a purpose, it provides some level of guarantee that companies that are acting in good faith are generally reporting correct numbers. Auditors don't do what people seem to think they should do - invest…

1) auditors do uncover errors. sometimes those errors leaad to firings and restatements. An entire company does not need to be complicit with fraud, for there to be fraud. key employees commit fraud to enrich themselves or make their numbers look better. from that perspective, the board does benefit from existing audits.

Also audit is highly regulated. If the standards are too loose the PCAOB can come in and punish you severely.

Its the pervasive cases, the wirecards, that are hard. Those are the frauds that are pervasive and go to the top, and include auditors that are not pushing back. These are the true landmines.

How are they addressed? Many ways: A) There is a layer of prevention, where audit firms will force rotation of their lead audit partners on an audit every 2-3 years to prevent cozy relationships.

B) And theres Also the "audit the auditor" where another partner has the sole job of reviewing the work done. He's the landmine hound looking for explosives.

2) the insurance business actually rakes in profits typically after a large disaster, when premiums are sky high and customers are are hyper aware of the risks (and Boards unforgiving with CEOs that fail to mitigate the risks.

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#296
post #286
post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm saying they are 5x more expensive than they need to be. So most of the money that goes to the agencies is de facto corruption, even if it goes to the workers who are working, but ouputting not much.

Where did you get that 5x number? The rate cards we use are tied to market rates. Consulting (and services businesses in general) aren't super-profitable. I think probably you're just pulling numbers out of thin air. Now if you think that the value of consultants is overrated, I tend to agree with you in some - but not all - cases. As an example, it makes little sense to hire FTEs for a short term project that has to…

Healthcare.gov (Obamacare) was a $1B, and it didn't work. Some Google Engineers came in to save it.

In Canada, the 'Gun Registry' cost $700M and it could be literally an access database not even mySQL. Literally probably could fit in Excel.

The governments custom payroll is going to cost another $1B and it still does not work, they are looking for alternatives.

It's fraud. The bill $1B for a piece of shit that a handfull of decent Engineers could have built for 10% the cost.

It's blind leading the blind leading the blind who don't care. Everyone's repuation is a stake so they will lie lie lie.

Bureaucrats believe the smooth sales pitch and have no clue what a good project should look like.

We need much better standards for IT projects because this is going to kill us.

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#297
post #296
post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you get that 5x number? The rate cards we use are tied to market rates. Consulting (and services businesses in general) aren't super-profitable. I think probably you're just pulling numbers out of thin air. Now if you think that the value of consultants is overrated, I tend to agree with you in some - but not all - cases. As an example, it makes little sense to hire FTEs for a short term project that has to…

Healthcare.gov (Obamacare) was a $1B, and it didn't work. Some Google Engineers came in to save it. In Canada, the 'Gun Registry' cost $700M and it could be literally an access database not even mySQL. Literally probably could fit in Excel. The governments custom payroll is going to cost another $1B and it still does not work, they are looking for alternatives. It's fraud. The bill $1B for a piece of shit that a hand…

The best fraud is to inflate the cost of the project 10-100x.

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#298
post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Auditors have access to all the financials, but they only audit a statistically significant sample, because it would be incredibly expensive to audit every transaction. Fraud can be easily detected if one employee is committing it. Fraud is substantially harder to find if two employees are involved, specifically 2 employees involved in internal controls. For instance, if you have a policy that all checks paid over $1…

> Source: am a CPA Your comment was the first in this comment section where everything was coherent and on point. While everyone else is spitballing, you hit the nail on the head. I was not surprised at all that you revealed you’re a CPA because the accuracy of your comment perfectly conveys your credentials. Funny how things like that can come through. Source: am also a CPA

Fellow software devs & CPAs unite! Thanks for the kind words.

There aren't many of us, so I’d love to connect. If you want, shoot me note at: Anthonyj at gwu.edu

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany is not small to medium business friendly. No need to argue about that.

do you have any sources for that? Considering that in germany, the "Mittelstand" is the major economic engine powering the economy compared to major corporations.

Just experience. Maybe my claim is too strong, and I should exclude medium businesses from it.

Re: EY gets banned from new audit business in Germany

#300
post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big consulting firm runs a program/project to deliver a result. Perhaps implement a new business system or technology or integration, optimize or implement a new process, perform some organizational change in the way things are done, etc. Companies don’t have the skills or experience or expertise or resources or time in-house to do it themselves, so they essentially outsource the initiative or objective to a cons…

Agree with all of these except the “pay little.” Top consulting firms are crazy expensive to the point we could hire a team of several analysts and a manager for a few years for what we pay them. Engagements are often around $100k a month and when I go looking for one of the consultants to help in an emergency, I often hear they are busy with something else (another client) and need a day to get the request started.…

$100,000 a month is nothing. That’s like 1-3 full time consultants, at like a $200-600 bill rate.

My current client is spending $300M+ a year on an implementation program, and they are going on their third year with 2-3 more to go.

When I say pay little, they need more people and/or more experienced people to actually get the job done right. But they end up off shoring to teams in India or green consultants with zero industry background and limited experience.

They choose the firm with the most compelling economics, but severely overlook quality. They forget that these are organizational changes that impact humans. That outsourcing to lower skilled or different cultural regions will impact communication and team dynamics and overall ability to get things done properly.

Post reply on HN